This position paper describes requirements for "linked data profiles" motivated by eGovernment. Here a "profile" describes the set of RDF terms (classes, properties, individuals) used in a dataset. The paper makes the excellent point that if many datasets are to be combined for the purposes of query, then it is essential that they use a common profile, otherwise the queries would become overly complex, e.g. in the absence of a common profile, to get the name of an organization some datasets may used skos:prefLabel while others use dcterms:title.

The paper states "Whilst OWL has the capability to express how a dataset has been constrained". I disagree that this is a pragmatic use of OWL with the standard semantics due to OWA and non-UNA.

The paper does not propose a solution, so it would be a suitable Lightning Talk.

The main point of this paper seems to be: we need validation, specifically against profiles. That requirement is grounded in some real world usage, but there's not a lot of detail beyond that. One could view this as a use case talk ("we're users and we need validation against profiles"), a technology and solutions talk ("we need the profile validation technology"), or maybe standards and tech development process ("we need to think about how these profiles are identified and shared, and how we then validate against them")